18 comments:

Anonymous
said...

I'm not sure you understand that people in council chambers were celebrating the bill passed out of committee to the full council 4:1. We were not celebrating the amendments. That is an incorrect assumption. They could have deferred the vote and killed the bill. There is alot to celebrate, but just a step. Tuesday we try to re-strengthen the bill.

Perhaps it is time to get the visitor industry in on this mess. Who would want to visit a toxic dump of an island? Rather than going down to the shore and waving aloha to the visitors and just smiling.....maybe it is time to make the visitors aware of what a toxic dump they are visiting!

I think this Bill targets Seed Companies that are using Less pesticides rather than the State and County who this bill should pertain to. 7,727 pounds by Ag Operations and 28,350 pounds by the County? That's not right. This bill is just plain silly. And to think I was for this bill disgusts me.

the county use is chlorine, I'll assume it's for the water system purification. Much to celebrate, the bills passage at the committee level and your return. Mahalo for laying out the facts in a comprehensible way without any rhetoric . Mahalo due to Jo Ann and Nadine even if it is weaker, it still is a great beginning

"Gone from the findings are declarations ...that the situation on Kauai is “unlike those facing any other county in the State of Hawai‘i” ...Removed as well was the assertion that Kauai, “more than any other county in the State of Hawai‘i,” has become a site of increased commercial ag, along with all references to field testing and experimental organisms."

OK, these were obviously biotech pesticide company demands to remove these findings. Here's why. Because the State has delegated the power to regulate county-specific issues to the counties. With these amendments, the Biotech Corporations will no doubt now claim "see, its not a local Kauai issue - its statewide!" They took out the local parts.

Under Gary's bill, it was clearly a local bill about local issues. That's why is couldn't be preempted by State law, as Gary wrote it. But now, after J and N take out the "local" language - they make it much more vulnerable to a preemption challenge.

And there you have it. Joann and Nadine sabotaging the enforceability of the bill, while still being able to claim that they supported it.

I agree with you 6:18.It was just a matter of time before yukimura got her claws into the bill. And nakamura, well one canʻt expect a whole lot of independent braincells to jump forward at attention.

I am awed by the kind of reprehensible behavior yukimura demonstrates. At the march, she walked - then stood at the onset of where the marchers were arriving en masse to the park area, as if she was awaiting her flock to annoint her.It was really disgusting. Then she proceeded to SUCK the kudos and glory from the public for supporting the bill and was busy shredding it the whole time. I knew this. J. Jay, are you still licking shoes clean?

Joann is a politician n Nadine well..... Joann proved her politics after Iniki and thats why she neva get back on the council the first time. Get rid of her and all of them. TOXIC jus like da aina! people look at this through rose colored glasses need to &^%^&% wake up! It will go to ballot and drag on and on and on. Next up, waialua, kealia.... this bill is stripped to nothing.What a Joke, only it's not funny!

The bill is still subject to a preemption challenge. The bill's findings could have stated that Kauai is the only island with GMOs and a pesticide problem. That would not change the language in the State's pesticide law. As for the County doing it, well, you heard Gary and Tim. They thought that the County could enforce the original bill with one inspector. All you Gary disciples should remember this passage from Joan's September 17 post:

"The truth is, this bill is very unlikely to ever be enforced. Its sponsor, Councilman Gary Hooser, told me from the start that it would rely on voluntary compliance by the chemical/seed companies. But wait, isn't that what we have now with the state? Isn't voluntary compliance exactly what people believe is inadequate?

Later, when I expressed my dismay to Gary about the polarizing effects of a bill that I saw as essentially meaningless, as in sounds tough but lacks teeth, he tried to ease my concerns.

It doesn't even matter if it's enforced, he told me. All that matters is getting it passed."